Author Archive

The Quest for Community

Author: Merril Mascarenhas

There is a lot of discussion among marketers about the importance of community in today's networked world. The "quest for community", as Robert Nisbet, American sociologist and Vice-Chancellor at the University of California puts it, is "a nostalgia for a compassable and integral living unit". It has to do with changes in the way we interact and communicate.

The critical question is not whether community is important but how the definition of community has evolved and whether our lives have become more jangled and fragmented which has led to a desire for new connections with strangers. A lot has been written about the trend. But the trend isn’t just restricted to online communities.

The success of Starbucks has been built on the desire of consumers for a "third place”- away from work and home. Ray Oldenburg talked about it in “The Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons, and Other Hangouts at the Heart of a Community”.

The success of Credit Unions is also built on this concept. In a recent interview, Ms. Christine Zalzal, AVP, Sales and Marketing, FirstOntario Credit Union, said that the grassroots strategy of a Credit Union is about being part of the community and staying for the long run in those communities.

What does this mean for marketers? They should look at the "quest for community" as an integral part of their marketing plans – at a strategic level. Different age groups and consumer segments have very different definitions of community. Often, “community” is quickly translated into a tactic- a presence on Facebook, Twitter and Myspace in a marketing plan. It is really more about understanding what defines a sense of community for your most profitable consumers and leveraging this insight for a deeper connection with them. The question to ask is what is the "third place" for your brand?

A tapestry segmentation system can help. It combines the “who” of lifestyle demography with the “where” of local neighborhood geography to create a model of various lifestyle classifications or segments of actual neighborhoods with addresses—distinct behavioral market segments. Adding the layer of a deeper understanding of the context of their "quest for community" can open up new opportunities to create a more meaningful dialogue with your brand with or without the constraint of geography.

Merril Mascarenhas

Early Adopters and the Mass Market

Author: Merril Mascarenhas

A well-established principle of marketing says that a small group of early adopters can spur mass-market acceptance of a new product. But how do early adopters react when its brand is accepted by the mass market? And do mass markets react the same way that early adopters do to the same brand? Marketers assume that dominating the first market (early adopters) will also help them dominate the second market (mass market).

Wharton marketing professors David Reibstein and John Zhang have explored the topic and say that a company could experience a backlash as early adopters move on to other new products. An example is Porsche, a successful brand for sports car enthusiasts. The brand saw a decline in sports car sales after it entered the SUV mass market. The backlash was significant.

In fact, as The New York Times points out, teenagers would rather text their friends a message rather than post it on Twitter. Instead, Twitter has been embraced by an older demographic. Twitter’s success has shattered a widely held belief that young people lead the way to popularizing innovations. The brand has proved that an offering can take off in a different demographic than you expect and become very popular. Twitter is defying the traditional model.

So why do marketers assume that success with early adopters will lead to quick adoption by the mass market? The "early adopter" concept is flawed because they aren’t always a good indicator of the growth potential of a brand nor do they have an extended Customer Lifetime Value. Most early adopters move on to the next big thing and may not be loyal to brands.

What is more important is to identify your most profitable potential customers. These profitable customers will eventually be the core of your growth strategy and profitability. The important indicator is the rate of adoption - the relative speed with which the most profitable consumers adopt an innovation. Success depends on an organization's ability to build and maintain loyal and valued customer relationships. Therefore, it is essential to build refined strategies for customers based on their value to the organization. The best marketing strategies pursue long-term relationships with profitable customers.

Two questions for you: (1) Who is your most profitable customer? (2) What is their lifetime value to your organization?

Please email me for our "View from the Top" series on best practices in customer satisfaction strategies.

Green Marketing and Brand Strategy

Author: Merril Mascarenhas

The latest research indicates that uncertain economic conditions have resulted in a decline in the core group of “Green Involved” consumers who would pay a premium for green products (17% in 2008 to 15% in 2009). The study (nationally representative sample of 2,465 adults, ages 18+) indicates that 2.7% of shoppers account for 70% of “informed and conscious green” purchases. Moreover, only 1 in 10 “green” shoppers is an “organic” shopper. Grocery transactions tend to be larger when green products are in the cart. In addition, 38% (45% in 2008) of Canadian consumers feel "highly concerned" about environmental issues. Even though consumers who feel “highly knowledgeable” about these issues increased to 29% (26% in 2008).

Transition to the mainstream

The transition has been driven by mainstream brands. Today, green has become another product attribute in a matrix of good-better-best benefit hierarchies. Tide has "biodegradable" ingredients. Others are labelled concentrates and cold water detergents. These are add-on benefits and enhance the core value proposition of the brand. They do not replace that core value proposition (superior product performance).

Today's customers are more demanding. They don’t believe all the claims being made by marketers- a fall out of greenwashing. Consumer scepticism has led marketers to include eco labels in their communication strategies. North America has over 350 eco-labels offered by trusted third parties. Marketers have laucnhed blogs and social networks with "fans" who contribute new product ideas. Method has its own Facebook page complete with a wall of comments from many of their 7,415 "fans" and a Twitter following of 3,284 users. Tide has 104,235 Facebook fans.

Please email me for additional insights from Arcus Consulting Group's studies on changing market drivers & successful strategic responses.

“Confirmation Bias” and Brand Loyalty

Author: Merril Mascarenhas

Our minds hate change. Several studies have shown that people are twice as likely to seek information that confirms their beliefs than they are to consider evidence that contradicts them. This "confirmation bias" can influence how consumers and marketers make decisions.

Henry Ford famously said, "If I had asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have asked for a faster horse." In other words, the road to true innovation is rarely illuminated by customers telling you what to do next; they may often not know what they want next or rely on a "confirmation bias" about their preferences.

We see this behaviour in all our decisions. A case in point is how retail investors hold on to stocks in a falling market, believing that the markets will rise, without any empirical evidence that this is likely to happen. Consumer confidence is a big driver of purchase behaviour. If consumers believe this recession will last a lot longer than it will because they recently lost their jobs, they are likely to scale back discretionary spending even after they find a new job because of a "confirmation bias".

In short, the human mind acts like a compulsive yes-man who echoes whatever you want to believe. Psychologists call this mental gremlin the "confirmation bias". A recent analysis of psychological studies with nearly 8,000 participants concluded that people are twice as likely to seek information that confirms what they already believe as they are to consider evidence that would challenge those beliefs.

Why is a mind-made-up so hard to penetrate?

Psychologists say its easier for consumers to repeat decisions than to take new ones. Whatever decisions consumers are inclined to make, are the decisions consumers are likely to go about justifying. It's simply easier to focus our attention on data that supports our preferences, rather than to seek out evidence that might disprove it. "Confirmation bias" is one of the biggest drivers and often under reported influencers of brand loyalty. It transcends the usual influencers such as product performance, emotional empathy and brand recognition.

It also is easier for people to rationalize than to be rational. Consumers and marketers are very good at cooking up post-hoc explanations of why our predictions didn't work or why we made some decisions. We tend to reinterpret our failures as near-misses.

The more you learn, the more certain you become that you are right. While gathering more data makes people more confident, it doesn't make their predictions much more accurate. Each new fact makes you more inclined to find another fact that resembles it, reducing the diversity and value of your information.

Confirmation bias contaminates the thinking of brand preferences of consumers. A lot of psychological traps can be combated with humility, but on this one, that doesn't help. For example, several North American auto companies missed the significant growth opportunity in fuel efficient cars because they clung to outdated strategies for gas guzzling SUVs and eroded brand value with carrots such as 'employee pricing'.

So how can marketers counteract confirmation bias?

A way to approach it is to imagine that you have looked into a crystal ball and have seen that your strategy has gone bust. Next, come up with the most compelling explanations you can find for the failure. This exercise, which some of the most innovative and successful marketers have integrated into their research process, can help you realize that your beliefs regarding why consumers might or might not prefer your brand might not be as solid as you thought.

Try estimating the odds that your analysis is wrong. Let us say that you reckon there is a 20% chance of an adverse outcome; that is like saying you will be proven wrong one in every five times. This way, if the investment does go awry, you will be less likely to dig in your analytical heels and desperately try to prove that you are still right. This procedure provides "psychological cover for admitting that you're wrong."

Show your ideas and strategies to another person you respect whose ego isn't already invested in the decision. Ask: If you didn't have to take this decision, would you still agree with it?

Run an imaginary strategy alongside your real one. There, you can change it at will, with no risk to your brand portfolio. On that blank slate, would you do more—or less—of your existing approach to strategy and consumer engagement? Some strategists requires each team member to run a stress test of their brand portfolio and to justify any differences between their paper strategies and the company’s real-world plans. It helps senior executives know what people really think.

Before you decide on a marketing or business strategy in the first place, write down a statement of what would compel you to change your view of the strategy. If any of those influencers come to pass, the written record will make it harder for you to pretend nothing has changed or that you don't have to do anything in response.

Most innovative marketers say that fighting confirmation bias is a never-ending battle. But if you can't conquer this gremlin of your own mind, you don't stand a chance of outwitting your competitors.

Please email me if you would like to receive Arcus Consulting Group's series on "Better consumer engagement strategies".


“Confirmation Bias” and Brand Loyalty

Author: Merril Mascarenhas

Our minds hate change. Several studies have shown that people are twice as likely to seek information that confirms their beliefs than they are to consider evidence that contradicts them. This "confirmation bias" can influence how consumers and marketers make decisions.

Henry Ford famously said, "If I had asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have asked for a faster horse." In other words, the road to true innovation is rarely illuminated by customers telling you what to do next; they may often not know what they want next or rely on a "confirmation bias" about their preferences.

Most innovative marketers say that fighting confirmation bias is a never-ending battle. But if you can't conquer this gremlin of your own mind, you don't stand a chance of outwitting your competitors.

We see this behaviour in all our decisions. A case in point is how retail investors hold on to stocks in a falling market, believing that the markets will rise, without any empirical evidence that this is likely to happen. Consumer confidence is a big driver of purchase behaviour. If consumers believe this recession will last a lot longer than it will because they recently lost their jobs, they are likely to scale back discretionary spending even after they find a new job because of a "confirmation bias".

In short, the human mind acts like a compulsive yes-man who echoes whatever you want to believe. Psychologists call this mental gremlin the "confirmation bias". A recent analysis of psychological studies with nearly 8,000 participants concluded that people are twice as likely to seek information that confirms what they already believe as they are to consider evidence that would challenge those beliefs.

Why is a mind-made-up so hard to penetrate?

Psychologists say its easier for consumers to repeat decisions than to take new ones. Whatever decisions consumers are inclined to make, are the decisions consumers are likely to go about justifying. It's simply easier to focus our attention on data that supports our preferences, rather than to seek out evidence that might disprove it. "Confirmation bias" is one of the biggest drivers and often under reported influencers of brand loyalty. It transcends the usual influencers such as product performance, emotional empathy and brand recognition.

It also is easier for people to rationalize than to be rational. Consumers and marketers are very good at cooking up post-hoc explanations of why our predictions didn't work or why we made some decisions. We tend to reinterpret our failures as near-misses.

The more you learn, the more certain you become that you are right. While gathering more data makes people more confident, it doesn't make their predictions much more accurate. Each new fact makes you more inclined to find another fact that resembles it, reducing the diversity and value of your information.

Confirmation bias contaminates the thinking of brand preferences of consumers. A lot of psychological traps can be combated with humility, but on this one, that doesn't help. For example, several North American auto companies missed the significant growth opportunity in fuel efficient cars because they clung to outdated strategies for gas guzzling SUVs and eroded brand value with carrots such as 'employee pricing'.

So how can marketers counteract confirmation bias?

A way to approach it is to imagine that you have looked into a crystal ball and have seen that your strategy has gone bust. Next, come up with the most compelling explanations you can find for the failure. This exercise, which some of the most innovative and successful marketers have integrated into their research process, can help you realize that your beliefs regarding why consumers might or might not prefer your brand might not be as solid as you thought.

Try estimating the odds that your analysis is wrong. Let us say that you reckon there is a 20% chance of an adverse outcome; that is like saying you will be proven wrong one in every five times. This way, if the investment does go awry, you will be less likely to dig in your analytical heels and desperately try to prove that you are still right. This procedure provides "psychological cover for admitting that you're wrong."

Show your ideas and strategies to another person you respect whose ego isn't already invested in the decision. Ask: If you didn't have to take this decision, would you still agree with it?

Run an imaginary strategy alongside your real one. There, you can change it at will, with no risk to your brand portfolio. On that blank slate, would you do more—or less—of your existing approach to strategy and consumer engagement? Some organizations require each team member to run a stress test of their brand portfolio and to justify any differences between their paper strategies and the company’s real-world plans. It helps senior executives know what people really think.

Before you decide on a marketing or business strategy in the first place, write down a statement of what would compel you to change your view of the strategy. If any of those influencers come to pass, the written record will make it harder for you to pretend nothing has changed or that you don't have to do anything in response.

Please email me if you would like to receive Arcus Consulting Group's series on "Better consumer engagement strategies".